Suicide by Oxygen Deprivation with Helium: A Preliminary Study of British Columbia Coroner Investigations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article researches a relatively new suicide method advanced by right-to-die organizations: oxygen deprivation by breathing helium inside a plastic hood. The article begins with a review of the role of the coroner and the history of oxygen deprivation with helium; it then examines 20 Judgements of Inquiry (JOI) by British Columbia coroners into this form of suicide. The JOI were obtained through the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and cover the period of 1999 to 2007. Findings raise concerns about the coding system used by coroners as well as adherence to internal documentation guidelines. The British Columbia Coroners Service (BCCS) has a public safety mandate to investigate all unnatural deaths and to make recommendations to prevent deaths in similar circumstances. It is a concern that BCCS has no recommendations to prevent suicides by oxygen deprivation with helium. More in-depth, systematic research is recommended to determine the prevalence of suicide by oxygen deprivation and to develop strategies to benefit public health and safety.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".